Enter your email to subscribe:

Last week Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) convened a consultation on the relationship between climate change and human rights in preparation of an OHCHR study on this subject, which is due to be considered by the Human Rights Council at its tenth session in March 2009. More than 150 representatives of States, Inter-governmental organizations, national human rights institutions and civil society organizations contributed to an engaging and fruitful discussion on the interface between climate change and human rights.

The Human Rights Council's March 28 2008 resolution 7/23 mandated the OHCHR to conduct an analytical study on the relationship between human rights and climate change, taking into account the views of States, relevant inter-governmental organizations and other stakeholders. The study will be considered by the Council at its tenth session in March 2009. Together with a summary of the Council's debate, the study will be made available to the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

For more information on the OHCHR study, you can visit the OHCHR site (Study details) or contact the Human Rights, Economic and Social Issues Unit, RRDD, OHCHR (contact: Ulrik Halsteen at e-mail: uhalsteen@ohchr.org).

The NY Times reported that oil prices dropped below $70 a barrel for the first time in 14 months on Thursday, causing OPEC to call for an emergency meeting next week to establish some
stabilize oil prices. NY Times link Oil prices have slid nearly $40 a barrel in three weeks because demand for energy is expected to drop as the global economy slows. Oil traded at a record $145 a
barrel during July 2008.

OPEC might allow prices to stabilize at a relatively low level ($80-$100) in the hopes that lower oil prices will provide an economic stimulus. According to the NY Times, consumers would have $250 billion more, over a
year, to save or spend elsewhere if oil prices stayed at the current level. Based on pessimistic predictions about the extent of global economic slow down, some analysts expect price to fall as low as $50 a barrel during the winter. Natural gas prices have also fallen from their summer peak of
$13.58/TCF to $6.81.

Volatile prices, along with the credit crisis, have created significant disincentives for large investments in long-term oil and gas projects -- which in turn could lead to oil and gas shortages when the global economy turns around and global demand for oil and gas increases. That raises the prospect of skyrocketing prices that might moderate or interfere with recovery. The NY Times noted that growth in demand has outstripped the ability of oil producers to increase production: "Many
experts have predicted a new squeeze within the next five years that
could once again propel oil prices over $100 a barrel."

I'll wager that prices five years from now (based on a 3 month average) will exceed $125.

As the Dow shed 733 points [NY Times link], crude oil dropped to below $ 75 a barrel for the first time since August 2007. MarketWatch link At the close in New York, the Dow Jones industrial average was down 733
points, or 7.8 %, largely erasing Monday’s 936-point gain. The
broader Standard & Poor 500 index was down an even greater 9 %.
The technology-heavy Nasdaq was down 8.4 percent.

Even though governments are attempting to fix the credit crisis, the stock markets understand that the economic problems on Main Street transcend those of Wall Street. Recession, unemployment, low retail sales, foreclosures, stagnant or falling housing prices, slow housing starts and sales, higher manufacturing costs, and the likelihood that the credit crisis will continue: why would anyone be betting on the economy right now? Not the folks who buy oil futures, for sure.

Yesterday the Guardian published an opinion piece by Kevin Gallagher (Washington Consensus Dead?) on Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman's work on strategic trade policy, pointing out that his Nobel Prize is the nail in the coffin of the free trade "Washington consensus." Krugman explains why it is rational for governments to engage in strategic use of tariffs and subsidies in order to create a niche industry. The same sort of strategic trade policy makes it rational for governments to engage in strategic use of tariffs and subsidies to support ecological sustainability and social well-being. Perhaps the pendulum will swing against the free traders enough so that we can protect the global environment through trade and other economic sanctions against nations unwilling to act in a socially and environmentally responsible manner.

Gallagher's opinion:Last Friday the New York Times quoted the World Bank as saying "There's no question the Washington consensus is dead," indeed it "died at the time of the $700bn bail-out." If the bail-out is death, then awarding Paul Krugman the Nobel prize for economics is the nail in the coffin.

Paul Krugman did not win the Nobel for his popular critiques of Bush-era economic policy in his New York Times column, though the column no doubt helped raise his profile outside the economics profession. The Nobel committee cited Krugman's theoretical contributions to the economics of international trade, the policy implications of which fly in the face of the Washington consensus ( where the mantra is to free up trade every chance you get).

Among Krugman's achievements in the field of international trade is "strategic trade policy". In this work Krugman (and others) showed that tariffs and subsidies to domestic industries can divert profits away from highly concentrated foreign firms and increase a nation's income. Though Krugman himself shies away from prescribing such policy, the textbook example of strategic trade theory is the choice by the Brazilian government to subsidise and develop the aircraft company Embraer. The free-trade theories espoused by the Washington consensus would warn Brazil of the high cost of subsidisation. To free traders, Brazil should focus on its advantage in agricultural products and forget about climbing the manufacturing ladder. Strategic trade theory helps explain why Brazil was willing to gamble in the short term to become one of the finest aircraft manufactures over the long term. They squeezed foreign firms out of the market and carved out a global niche for themselves.

In another classic book, Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, Krugman argued that the government should also play a role in connecting beneficiaries of strategic trade policy to the overall economy. Evoking the work of economists such as Albert O Hirschman and Paul Rosenstein Rodan, Krugman argued that developing countries often needed a "big push" of coordinated government investments to help strategic industries get off the ground and to link the growth of such industry to the economy as a whole.

Problem is, today's trading system is out of whack with these frontier issues in economic thought. In a study published by Boston University's Pardee Centre for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, trade lawyer Rachel Denae Thrasher and I examined the extent to which the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreements, European Union trade agreements, and United States trade agreements bit into a nation's ability to deploy strategic trade and other industrial policies to benefit from the globalisation process.

We find that in general the world's trading system makes it much more difficult for nations to craft strategic trade and industrial policies for growth and development. Indeed, enshrined in virtually all trade agreements is the "national treatment" idea that says a nation may not treat its domestic industries any differently than foreign ones. That may make sense when rich nations compete against each other, but in a world where 57.6% of the population lives on less than $2.50 per day, one size can't fit all. This restriction is accentuated in provisions for foreign investment, intellectual property, and subsidies.

Interestingly however, we find that there is more "policy space" for innovative growth strategies under the WTO than under most regional trade agreements – especially those pushed by the US. In fact, we find that US-style trade agreements are the most severe in constraining the ability of developing countries to deploy such policy. EU agreements, interestingly, tend to have the same policy space as the WTO.

It doesn't make sense that the World Bank and (implicitly) the Nobel committee are declaring the death of the Washington consensus when the US is choking the ability of nations to use policies that are gaining increasing legitimacy in theory and practice. Change is in the air. As we know in the aftermath of the financial crisis, the US has justified – like never before – a strong role for government in economic affairs. And, of the two presidential candidates, Obama has expressed concern over the direction of US trade policy and has pledged to rethink it. Perhaps these events will make strategic trade and industrial policy rise again.

Take a look at the world happiness map. The richest countries do not have the highest degree of satisfaction with life. But the poorest countries certainly have a far lower level of happiness. Apparently, according to researchers at the University of Leicester, the happiest nations have moderate wealth and lower expectations. Imagine if the wealthiest nations lowered their expectations and redistributed a bit of that wealth -- it might truly be a win-win situation.happiness_map.pdf

I just returned from an International Water Training Conference hosted by EDGE Outreach in Indiana.

It was a bit different from your standard conference: I actually learned to do something. I can build and install a community water purification system. I can build and install a community water treatment system. I can do a community water, sanitation, and hygiene assessment. I can lead community hygiene education. I even learned a bit about how to do all of this in a cross-cultural situation!

The training was aimed at people who are actively doing community-based water development work. The development community itself appears to be broken into three parts: (1) the official development organizations, funding projects through official development aid and international financing from the World Bank, IMF, regional development banks and such; (2) the non-governmental organizations run by professional water management types -- who provide water and sanitation in developed countries and who do charitable work in developing countries -- WaterAid and Water for People; and (3) the missionaries who work on lots of issues throughout the developing world. This conference was organized and aimed at the third group.

I spent time talking to people who work in Ghana, Guyana, Kenya, Haiti, Costa Rica, and dozens of other places. The need is immense and unrelenting. 1.5 million people are dying of preventable water borne diseases every year -- a child every 15 seconds. You really can install a village water purification system for a bit more than $ 1000; you really can develop new water supplies for a village for $ 5000 - $15,000. You can really make a difference.

One of the best parts of the conference was Bill Deutsch from Auburn discussing watershed management and the need to look upstream to prevent some of the water contamination problems. The light bulbs going on in people's minds were almost visible -- there will be some sustainable water systems developed throughout the world thanks to the wisdom he shared. The other concept he shared was that most of the work being done is first and second "generation" development work -- aimed at disasters and individual communities. The work that isn't being done and needs to be done is third and fourth "generation" development work -- the regional, national, and international policy levels. That's really my work in the area. We need to secure the human right to clean drinking water. We need to assure that the community-based water development work is sustainable in terms of being coordinated with integrated water resources development and with climate change adaptation planning. We need to find ways to increase the funding available for community-based water development -- beyond official aid and international financial institutions. This is the challenge. Let me know if you want to help.

Finally folks are calming down. The Dow gained almost a thousand points today. It needed to. While I was away in Indiana, learning how to build and install community water purification and treatment plants, the stock markets were going nuts. Fortunately, I didn't have to watch, but here's what it looked like over the last 5 days. The beginning was around 10,000, the low point was down near 7500, as of today its back to about 5% down over a week. Not the right direction, but....

The IUCN released its most recent Red List of Threatened Species today at the IUCN World Conservation
Congress in Barcelona. IUCN Red List link The list shows at least 1,141 of the 5,487 mammals
on Earth are known to be threatened with extinction. At least 76
mammals have become extinct since 1500. But the results also show
conservation can bring species back from the brink of extinction, with
five percent of currently threatened mammals showing signs of recovery
in the wild.
“Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result
of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the
ecosystems where they live,” says Julia Marton-Lefèvre, IUCN Director General. “We
must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to
ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest
relatives.”

The real situation could be much worse as 836 mammals are listed as
Data Deficient. With better information more species may well prove to
be in danger of extinction. “The reality is that the number of threatened mammals could be as high as 36 percent,” says Jan Schipper, of Conservation International and lead author in a forthcoming article in Science. “This
indicates that conservation action backed by research is a clear
priority for the future, not only to improve the data so that we can
evaluate threats to these poorly known species, but to investigate
means to recover threatened species and populations.”

The results show 188 mammals are in the highest threat category of Critically Endangered, including the Iberian Lynx (Lynx pardinus),
which has a population of just 84-143 adults and has continued to
decline due to a shortage of its primary prey, the European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). China’s Père David’s Deer (Elaphurus davidianus), is
listed as Extinct in the Wild. However, the captive and semi-captive
populations have increased in recent years and it is possible that
truly wild populations could be re-established soon. It may be too
late, however, to save the additional 29 species that have been flagged
as Critically Endangered Possibly Extinct, including Cuba’s Little
Earth Hutia (Mesocapromys sanfelipensis), which has not been seen in nearly 40 years.

Nearly 450 mammals have been listed as Endangered, including the Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii),
which moved from Least Concern to Endangered after the global
population declined by more than 60 percent in the last 10 years due to
a fatal infectious facial cancer.

The Fishing Cat (Prionailurus viverrinus), found in Southeast Asia, moved from Vulnerable to Endangered due to habitat loss in wetlands. Similarly, the Caspian Seal (Pusa caspica)
moved from Vulnerable to Endangered. Its population has declined by 90
percent in the last 100 years due to unsustainable hunting and habitat
degradation and is still decreasing.

Habitat loss and degradation affect 40 percent of the world’s mammals.
It is most extreme in Central and South America, West, East and Central
Africa, Madagascar, and in South and Southeast Asia. Over harvesting is
wiping out larger mammals, especially in Southeast Asia, but also in
parts of Africa and South America.

The Grey-faced Sengi or Elephant-shrew (Rhynchocyon udzungwensis)
is only known from two forests in the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania,
both of which are fully protected but vulnerable to fires. The species
was first described this year and has been placed in the Vulnerable
category.

But it is not all bad news. The assessment of the world’s mammals shows
that species can recover with concerted conservation efforts. The
Black-footed Ferret (Mustela nigripes)
moved from Extinct in the Wild to Endangered after a successful
reintroduction by the US Fish and Wildlife Service into eight western
states and Mexico from 1991-2008. Similarly, the Wild Horse (Equus ferus)
moved from Extinct in the Wild in 1996 to Critically Endangered this
year after successful reintroductions started in Mongolia in the early
1990s.

The African Elephant (Loxodonta africana) moved from
Vulnerable to Near Threatened, although its status varies considerably
across its range. The move reflects the recent and ongoing population
increases in major populations in southern and eastern Africa. These
increases are big enough to outweigh any decreases that may be taking
place elsewhere.

“The longer we wait, the more expensive it will be to prevent future extinctions,” says Dr Jane Smart, Head of IUCN’s Species Programme. “We now know what species are threatened, what the threats are and where – we have no more excuses to watch from the sidelines.”

The project to assess the world’s mammals was conducted with help from
more than 1,800 scientists from over 130 countries. It was made
possible by the volunteer help of IUCN Species Survival Commission’s
specialist groups and the collaborations between top institutions and
universities, including Conservation International, Sapienza Università
di Roma, Arizona State University, Texas A&M University, University
of Virginia, and the Zoological Society of London.

More Information from IUCN News Release and IUCN Review of the 2008 Red List continues below

The employment report is just the latest in a series of
indicators showing that the economy was deteriorating rapidly as the third
quarter progressed. These include weak retail sales, weak auto sales, declining
durable goods orders, and a sharply weaker ISM manufacturing survey. The economy
was on the way down even before the latest tightening in the credit crunch. This
underlines that the purpose of the rescue package being debated in Congress is
damage limitation – minimizing the extent of the recession. –Nigel Gault,
Global Insight

The U.S. economy is shrinking, and there will be many more
awful reports like this. Payrolls were weak everywhere except government and
education; big change is in services, down a huge 82,000, way below the -15,000
prior trend. Note that the core unadjusted numbers even worse than the headline;
the seasonal was 80,000 better than September last year. –Ian Shepherdson,
High Frequency Economics

The Labor Dept indicated that it is “unlikely” the
hurricanes had a “substantial effect” on payrolls noting that the storm hit near
the end of the survey period. However, the “not at work due to bad weather”
series contained in the household survey spiked to 189,000 versus 34,000 in
August and 20,000 last September. This gauge is not directly applicable to the
payroll data, but we have long found that it is good proxy for weather-related
influences on payrolls. The September reading is close to what we had been
assuming and thus we continue to believe that the hurricanes probably subtracted
close to 50,000 from the payroll tally. Some of the job losses that resulted
from the hurricanes are likely to reappear in October, but this effect is likely
to be more than offset by the fallout tied to the Boeing strike and further
underlying deterioration in labor market conditions. –David Greenlaw, Morgan
Stanley

A good portion of the service sector declines occurred with
respect to the transportation industries, and those job losses are likely to be
much more than just a cyclical shift. As our economy continues to adjust to the
long-term reality of $100 oil, we can expect to see more structural job declines
in the transport sector. Financial sector job losses meanwhile sunk to -17,000,
though we remain concerned that many of the layoffs aren’t being captured in
these numbers–the data simply do not match the headlines. –Guy LeBas, Janney
Montgomery Scott

The collateral effects of the recent turmoil in the credit
markets will likely make the job losses even larger next month. So far this
year, 760k jobs have been lost. The economy has clearly slipped into a jobs
recession because the housing meltdown and credit market turmoil has spread to
the broader economy. Persistent job losses have probably pull the overall
economy into recession as well. –Stephen A. Wood, Insight Economics

The increase in unemployment The increase in unemployment
would have been larger but for a 121,000 drop in the labor force. The augmented
unemployment rate, which adjusts for marginally attached workers (i.e. those who
would like a job but are not actively looking) rose to 9.1% from 8.9%. –RDQ
Economics

As we and others have pointed out on many occasions, the
birth-death model employed by the BLS is serving to understate the true extent
of job losses in the private sector – the model added 42,000 private sector jobs
in September and over the past 10 months has added 801 thousand private sector
jobs (not seasonally adjusted). Over the nine months that total employment has
declined, the total job losses add up to 760,000. –Richard F. Moody, Mission
Residential